Poll Finds That 42% Of Young Americans Would Elect A Socialist President

[Speedwell]

So why did Republicans change all that after 1956 and stop caring about those issues?

In other words, the Southern Strategy.

 

[bekkilyn]

And then we hear that it's the Democrats have moved to the left, not Republicans to the right. You could run a solid Democratic campaign on that platform these days.

Yep, the Democratic party is basically the moderate to center-right party of what the GOP used to be. All this talk of "radical left" has no historical basis when it comes to the two major political parties.

 

[Speedwell]

Yep, the Democratic party is basically the moderate to center-right party of what the GOP used to be. All this talk of "radical left" has no historical basis when it comes to the two major political parties.

Thanks for posting that, bekkilyn. It reminds me of the old days when I was still a Republican.

 

[civilwarbuff]

And then we hear that it's the Democrats have moved to the left, not Republicans to the right. You could run a solid Democratic campaign on that platform these days.

Cuz the democrats running for the WH are too busy trying to 'out left' each other.....

 

[civilwarbuff]

I believe it primarily started with the rise of the Moral Majority/Religious Right/Fundamantalist-Evangelical factions becoming political and usurping the Republican party for their own interests.

If JFK were alive today the democratic party would disown him for his 'conservative' views.

 

[Speedwell]

Cuz the democrats running for the WH are too busy trying to 'out left' each other.....

They're still a lot closer to Ike's platform than the Republicans are.

 

[civilwarbuff]

They're still a lot closer to Ike's platform than the Republicans are.

But I wonder how much of it he actually carried out......both parties tend to exagerate their ability to carry out platforms.

 

[FreeinChrist]

I suspect most older Republicans would fight the removal of Medicare - which is a socialist program.

I suspect most older Republicans would fight the end of Social Security - which was regarded as a socialist program.

Many who opposed the Affordable Care Act now really like it. That was regarded as socialist.

Where is the anger about the subsidies given to the oil companies? That is socialism.
Subsidizing the farmers is socialism - and I think the responsible thing to do.

There are various forms of socialism.

 

[GodLovesCats]

But I wonder how much of it he actually carried out......both parties tend to exagerate their ability to carry out platforms.

Voters ignore the fact that when Congress is split, one side will kill the other side's proposals. For plans to be carried out, they must be controlled by the same party.

 

[FreeinChrist]

But I wonder how much of it he actually carried out......both parties tend to exagerate their ability to carry out platforms.

Quite a bit because most of America liked it.

Unions were very strong then.

He extended Social Security:
Eisenhower approves expanded Social Security coverage, Sept. 1, 1954

On this day in 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed into law a major expansion of the nation’s Social Security program.

The legislation, which originated in a Republican-controlled Congress, added some 10 million more Americans to the program, which was initiated in 1935 under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, a Democrat. It also increased payments to all retired workers by at least $60 a year while raising annual benefits for future retirees to as much as $4,200, or the equivalent of $31,500 when factoring for inflation.​

Dwight D. Eisenhower: Domestic Affairs | Miller Center

As President, Eisenhower thought that government should provide some additional benefits to the American people. He signed legislation that expanded Social Security, increased the minimum wage, and created the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. He also supported government construction of low-income housing but favored more limited spending than had Truman.

Eisenhower secured congressional approval of some important new programs that improved the nation's infrastructure. In partnership with Canada, the United States built the St. Lawrence Seaway. His most ambitious domestic project, the Interstate Highway program, established in 1956, created a 41,000-mile road system. This highway project, which, as the President said, involved enough concrete to build "six sidewalks to the moon," stimulated the economy and made driving long distances faster and safer.​

 

[FreeinChrist]

If JFK were alive today the democratic party would disown him for his 'conservative' views.

No, they wouldn't.

 

[FreeinChrist]

Adding that Eisenhower appointed Martin P. Durkin as the Secretary of Labor, yet he was a Democrat and president of the plumbers and steamfitters union.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

Too many people believing socialism will give them something for nothing.....

They might want yours
and wish to take mine?

No reason they should have to work for it.
That's old school.
M

 

[FreeinChrist]

He also supported government construction of low-income housing but favored more limited spending than had Truman.

​

By the way, many of the homes built in the 50's are thanks to Eisenhower's support of the construction of low-income housing. Many of those 3 bedroom ranch home that were built were bought with the help of the GI bill, allowing many WWII soldiers to buy homes.
My parents did okay with theirs. Mom finally sold hers in 2016 and it went in one day.

 

[Speedwell]

They might want yours
and wish to take mine?

No reason they should have to work for it.
That's old school.
M

Still, it is interesting to observe that most of those (in this forum, anyway) who think that socialism purports to offer "something for nothing" are on the Right.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Still, it is interesting to observe that most of those (in this forum, anyway) who think that socialism purports to offer "something for nothing" are on the Right.

You did not understand my comment.....commenting on the 42% "Too many people believing socialism will give them something for nothing....." I certainly don't believe that and based on the comments here no one on the right believes it either.

 

[Speedwell]

You did not understand my comment.....commenting on the 42% "Too many people believing socialism will give them something for nothing....." I certainly don't believe that and based on the comments here no one on the right believes it either.

If you don't believe it, and no one else on the Right believes it, why do you keep bringing it up? Certainly those of us on the left know better.

 

[civilwarbuff]

If you don't believe it, and no one else on the Right believes it, why do you keep bringing it up? Certainly those of us on the left know better.

Apparently not.....from the OP.....

“Forty-one percent (41%) of Democrats say they would vote for a presidential candidate who identifies himself or herself as a socialist, but only 19% of GOP voters and 16% of unaffiliateds agree,” Rasmussen notes.
...
A further Gallup poll from May found that 47% of all Americans would vote for a socialist presidential candidate. The poll noted that among Democrats, the support for socialism is even higher, with 70% declaring it would be better for America.

 

[Speedwell]

Apparently not.....from the OP.....

What has that got to do with the canard that people on the Left think socialism offers "something for nothing?"

 

[NightHawkeye]

The GREAT news in the recent poll is that Independents were the least likely group to vote for a socialist.

Without Independents, it will be really hard for a Socialist to win.